Report Outline

Section 1: Key Findings

Section 1A: Supporting Visualizations and Quotes

TBD

Section 2: Data Analysis Process

Section 2A: Data Wrangling

Steps:

  1. Read in data with the googlesheets4 package {.smaller}

  2. Read in gross receipts data

Section 2B: Data Cleaning

Steps:

  1. Delete extra variables

  2. Change column names to variables

  3. Change multiple choice answer into numbers

  4. split check all that apply responses into indicators

  5. Merge Gross Recipts to datasheet and add stratification

Section 3: Data Analysis by Survey Question

Section 3A: Demographic Information

Question: How long have you worked with this organization?


 1  2  3 
11 15 19 
               time RespondentCount Percentage
1         0-2 years              11      0.244
2         3-5 years              15      0.333
3 More than 5 years              19      0.422
[1] 4.111111
[1] 1.991142
[1] 4

Question 3: The following question pertains to minority leadership and service. For the purpose of this question, minority is defined as women, people of color, and immigrants. Ehich of the following best describes your organization? (please provide your best estimate).?

Percent of respondents stating, “our top executive position is held by a minority”

  count.Var1 count.Freq Percentage.Var1 Percentage.Freq
1          0         20               0       0.4444444
2          1         25               1       0.5555556

Percent of respondents stating, “More than 50% of our board is made up of minorities”

  count.Var1 count.Freq Percentage.Var1 Percentage.Freq
1          0         26               0       0.5777778
2          1         19               1       0.4222222

Percent of respondents stating, “More than 50% of program recipients are minorities”

  count.Var1 count.Freq Percentage.Var1 Percentage.Freq
1          0         19               0       0.4222222
2          1         26               1       0.5777778

Percent of respondents stating, “None of the above”

  count.Var1 count.Freq Percentage.Var1 Percentage.Freq
1          0         40               0       0.8888889
2          1          5               1       0.1111111
  • Based on the metrics above, 88.9% of the survey respondents reported to at least of the minority service or leadership criteria.

Section 3B: General sentiment

Questions 4-8:Plots of General sentiment and Years with the CBO

Findings:

  • Respondents working with their organization for 3-5 years have slightly more positive opinion towards the TB (not statistically significant)

Questions 4-8: Plots of General sentiment and size of CBO

Still waiting for Noah to update size classification standards
Number, percentages of CBOs in size categories
Number Respondants Percent of Total Respondants
CBO Size
  Less than 500k (group 1) 29 64.4%
  Between 500k and 1000k (group 2) 3 6.7%
  Greater than 1000k (group 3) 13 28.9%
  NA 0 0%

Findings:

  • As the median size CBO group has a much smaller sample size, we cannot safely conclude that small or large CBOs have more positive attitude towards the TB in all aspects.

Questions 4-8: Plots of General Sentiment and Minority Status

Number, percentages of respondants indicating minority leadership
# Yes (% Yes) # No (% No)
Minority Leadership
  Our top executive position is held by a minority 25 (56%) 20 (44%)
  More than 50% of our board is made up of minorities 19 (42%) 26 (58%)
  More than 50% of program recipients are minorities 26 (58%) 19 (42%)
  None of the above 5 (11%) 40 (89%)

Findings:

  • respondents’ attitude towards the TB are similar across organizations with different minority status. Part of the reason may be that respondents in these categories overlap with each other.
  • attitudes of respondents from organizations with no minority status are more flunctuated, which is likely related to the small sample size for that group

Response analysis

overall table:

Number, percentages of respondants to sentiment questions
#Strongly Agree (%) #Agree (%) #Neutral (%) #Disagree (%) #Strongly Disagree (%) #N/A (%)
TB has pos. impacted our CBO by reducing costs related to purchasing or renting tools and equipment 42 (93.3%) 3 (6.7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
TB has pos. impacted our CBO by reducing costs related to storing tools and equipment 26 (57.8%) 7 (15.6%) 7 (15.6%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (11.1%)
TB has pos. impacted our CBO by reducing staff time to complete maintenance/projects 19 (42.2%) 11 (24.4%) 8 (17.8%) 2 (4.4%) 0 (0%) 5 (11.1%)
the Tools made available through the TB allow our CBO to complete higher quality events/projects without additional funding 36 (80%) 7 (15.6%) 2 (4.4%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)
TB has pos. impacted our CBO 42 (93.3%) 3 (6.7%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%)

Percent of respondents that reported “Agreeing” or “Strongly Agreeing” that, “the ToolBank (TB) has positively impacted our CBO by reducing costs related to purchasing or renting tools and equipment”

      count.Var1 count.Freq Percentage.Var1 Percentage.Freq
1          Agree          3           Agree      0.06666667
2 Strongly agree         42  Strongly agree      0.93333333

Percent of respondents that reported “Agreeing” or “strongly Agreeing” that, “the TB has positively impacted our CBO by reducing costs related to storing tools and equipment

      count.Var1 count.Freq Percentage.Var1 Percentage.Freq
1          Agree          7           Agree       0.1555556
2            N/A          5             N/A       0.1111111
3        Neutral          7         Neutral       0.1555556
4 Strongly agree         26  Strongly agree       0.5777778

Percent of respondents that reported “Agreeing” or “strongly Agreeing” that, “the TB has positively impacted our CBO by reducing staff time to complete maintenance/projects

      count.Var1 count.Freq Percentage.Var1 Percentage.Freq
1          Agree         11           Agree      0.24444444
2       Disagree          2        Disagree      0.04444444
3            N/A          5             N/A      0.11111111
4        Neutral          8         Neutral      0.17777778
5 Strongly agree         19  Strongly agree      0.42222222

Percent of respondents that reported “Agreeing” or “strongly Agreeing” that, “the Tools made available through the TB allow our CBO to complete higher quality events/projects without additional funding

      count.Var1 count.Freq Percentage.Var1 Percentage.Freq
1          Agree          7           Agree      0.15555556
2        Neutral          2         Neutral      0.04444444
3 Strongly agree         36  Strongly agree      0.80000000

Question: TB has positively impacted our CBO

      count.Var1 count.Freq Percentage.Var1 Percentage.Freq
1          Agree          3           Agree      0.06666667
2 Strongly agree         42  Strongly agree      0.93333333

Plots

Findings:

  • 100% of respondents strongly agreed (93.3%) or agreed (6.7%) that the ToolBank positively impacts their CBO
  • 100% of respondents strongly agreed (93.3%) or agreed (6.7%) that the ToolBank reduced costs related to purchasing and renting tools and equipment
  • More than 95% or respondents strongly agreed (80.0%) or agreed (15.6%) that the tools made available through the ToolBank allow their CBO to complete higher quality events/projects without additional funding
  • respondents have comparatively less positive attitudes towards (still more than 60% of the respondent strongly agreed or agreed) the statements that the ToolBank positively impacted their CBO by reducing costs related to storing tools and equipment, and the ToolBank has positively impacted their CBO by reducing staff time to complete maintenance/projects

Section 3C: Economic Benefit

Respondence of all questions within this section are highly skewed, so we recommended reporting the data through sum, medians, or quantiles

Response analysis

Question: How much would you have spent purchasing or renting tools and equipment had the TB not existed?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   5028.889
2       Median   2000.000
3         Mode   2000.000
4           sd  14108.953
5 1st quantile    500.000
6 3rd quantile   3500.000
7          Sum 226300.000

Question: How much would you have spent on storage of tools and equipment had the TB not existed ?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   925.5556
2       Median   500.0000
3         Mode     0.0000
4           sd  1195.7606
5 1st quantile     0.0000
6 3rd quantile  1200.0000
7          Sum 41650.0000

Question: How much would you have spent on maintenance of tools and equipment had the TB not existed?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   816.6667
2       Median   300.0000
3         Mode   500.0000
4           sd  2227.4466
5 1st quantile    80.0000
6 3rd quantile   500.0000
7          Sum 36750.0000

Question: Reflecting on your events in the past year: If the TB did not exist, how much funding would your organization allocate to buying, storing, tracking and maintaining your own inventory of tools and equipment?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   2527.111
2       Median   1500.000
3         Mode   5000.000
4           sd   2532.100
5 1st quantile    800.000
6 3rd quantile   3000.000
7          Sum 113720.000

Question: number of total events hosted during last year

       Measure     Value
1         Mean  17.55556
2       Median   6.00000
3         Mode   3.00000
4           sd  25.65466
5 1st quantile   4.00000
6 3rd quantile  20.00000
7          Sum 790.00000

Question: If there were no TB, how many of your events in the past year would you not have been hosted for any reason?

       Measure      Value
1         Mean   6.222222
2       Median   2.000000
3         Mode   0.000000
4           sd  15.597041
5 1st quantile   1.000000
6 3rd quantile   5.000000
7          Sum 280.000000

Extra analysis: percent of event not host during last year

  Measure     Value
1    Mean 0.4057342
2  Median 0.3500000
3    Mode 0.0000000

Questions: If there were no TB, how many of your constituents, including volunteers, members, and event attendees, would have been negatively impacted in the past year?

       Measure     Value
1         Mean  1306.444
2       Median   150.000
3         Mode   100.000
4           sd  3077.895
5 1st quantile    75.000
6 3rd quantile   500.000
7          Sum 58790.000

Calculated:

Reflecting on your events in the past year, how many events did your organization host?

If there were no TB, how many of your events in the past year would you not have been able to host?

What percentage of the events hosted last year did the TB help make possible?

put all this into one table:
Impact on CBO if TB did not exists
Mean 25th quantile Median Mode 75th quantile Standard deviation Sum
Money That Would Have Been Spent if TB Did Not Exist*
  on Purchasing or renting tools and equipment 5029 500 2000 2000 3500 14109 226300
  on storage of tools and equipment 926 0 500 0 1200 1196 41650
  on maintenance of tools and equipment 817 80 300 500 500 2227 36750
  on buying, storing, tracking and maintaining own tool+equiptment inventory 2527 800 1500 5000 3000 2532 113720
# Events/People Impacted If TB Did Not Exist
  # events that would have been impossible in past year 6 1 2 0 5 16 280
  % of CBO’s total events that would have been impossible in past year 41 4 35 0 62 36 1826
  # constituents that would have been negatively impacted in the past year 1306 75 150 100 500 3078 58790
*in US dollars

Plots

# A tibble: 1 × 1
  `Average % of a CBO's events possible through TB in past year`
                                                           <dbl>
1                                                           40.6

Findings:

  • In an average year, the ToolBank helps to save money in buying, storing, tracking, and maintaining tools or equipments for the 45 respondents a sum value of $304, 700, among which purchasing tools and equipments cost our partner CBO the most with $226,300 (74.3%).
  • In the past year, the ToolBank helps to save money in buying, storing, tracking, and maintaining tools or equipments for the 45 respondents a sum value of $113,720.
  • Half of the respondents reported that at least 35% of their events would have been impossible without the help of the ToolBank.
  • A total of 280 events would have been impossible if the ToolBank did not exist.
  • Half of the respondents reported that at least 150 of their constituents (volunteers, members, and event attendees) would have been negatively impacted without the help of the ToolBank.
  • A total of 58,790 constituents (volunteers, members, and event attendees) of our CBO partners would haven been negatively impacted without the help of the ToolBank.

Section 3D: Community Impact

Question: With the money that you have saved on purchasing, storing, and maintaining tools and equipment, what have you been able to accomplish?

                               choices frequency percentage
1     Hired additional staff positions         2      0.044
2 Hosted additional projects or events        27        0.6
3                                other        11      0.244

Question: Without the TB, what would you no longer be able to fund?

   choices frequency percentage
1    Staff         2      0.044
2 Projects        26      0.578
3    other         7      0.156

Among partners indicated certain effect, what is the average quantified effects

[1] 1.5
[1] 2.12132
[1] 5.04
[1] 4.568734
Number, percentages of where Respondants report funding
# Respondants % Respondants
Accomplishments through money saved through TB
  Hired more staff 2 4.4%
  Hosted additional projects/events 27 60%
  Other 11 24.4%
Where funding would be cut if TB did not exist
  Cut staff funding 2 4.4%
  Cut project funding 26 57.8%
  Other 7 15.6%

Quantify effect of “other”, if selected

Findings:

  • More than half of the respondents agree that they can host additional projects or event with the fundings the ToolBanks helped to save (60.0%) and would need to cut project fundings if the ToolBank did not exist (57.8%).
  • Funding related to staff positions were less impacted by the ToolBank action.
  • 24.4% respondents reported the fundings the ToolBank helps them to save make them able to achieve accomplishments other than staff positions and projects.
  • 15.6% respondents reported that they need to cut fundings in items other than staff positions and projects if the ToolBank did not exist.

Section 3E: Analysis surrounding questions

Question: do organizations with higher savings through toolbank report more of a positive impact?

Question: How do savings vary by different toolbank offerings?

Question: What is the relationship like between minority-led CBOs and the toolbank compared to non-minority led CBOs?

Question: where within the organization does the Toolbank impact most?

Question: In what ways has the community benefited through the toolbank? What are the most prominent types of events (or organization types) the toolbank supports?

      choices frequency percentage
1    Quantity        25      0.556
2     Quality        35      0.778
3   Diversity         8      0.178
4 Consistency        30      0.667
5       other         2      0.044

                choices frequency percentage
1           Fundraising        14      0.311
2      Service Projects        34      0.756
3 Educational Workshops        15      0.333
4    Community Building        38      0.844
5                 other         6      0.133

Findings:

  • Respondents with more positive attitudes with the ToolBank helping reduce their costs in multiple aspects would have spent more on buying, storing and maintaining tools or equipments if the ToolBank did not exist (not statistically significant).
  • the ToolBank helps to save the most in purchasing tools and equipments than storing and maintaining those (not statistically significant).
  • Events got impacted by the TB mainly through their quality (77.8%), consistency (66.7%), and quantity (55.6%).
  • The most prominent types of events the toolbank supports are community building (84.4%) and service projects (75.6%).

Section 3F: marginal analysis on fundraising questions

[1] 45
[1] 32.82222
[1] 30
[1] 28.83124
  0%  25%  50%  75% 100% 
   0   10   30   50  100

Findings:

  • Half of the respond reported that using the the ToolBank equipements helped to save at least 30% of their event expense budget.